British Rabbits

[oshron]

hey, all. i seem to remember reading a while back that rabbits were introduced to the British Isles by the Normans. so, in a TL without the Normans, this would surely affect the presence of rabbits in Britain, if not completely butterfly it.

while i'd also like to discuss what the lack of rabbits could mean on history, the major reason i started this thread was to discuss what their absence could do to fiction, since rabbits feature pretty frequently in British stories: Peter Rabbit, Redwall, Watership Down...just to name a few

thoughts? ideas?

 

[Fox Eating Bamboo]

The Romans introduced the rabbits to Britain. By Norman days, rabbits had been in Britain for a thousand years.

No idea what a lack of rabbits would mean for Britain, but keeping the Romans and/or Normans out would mean a lot more for Britain than a lack of rabbits.

 

[LSCatilina]

Romans did.
Romans basically put rabbits everywhere, as they introduced it in Gaul for instance, and raised them in very large numbers (while it wasn't a domesticated rabbit to speak of)

Eventually rabbits, critically once truly domesticated, would have been introduced in Britain, would it be only for meat or fur purposes (Rabbits being an easy and quite cheap way to get both). If not Romans, then Germans. If not Germans, then Norse. If not Norse, then Normans. etc.

 

[oshron]

good to know, then what i read before must have been incorrect.

thread's purpose is fulfilled, then

 

[Simreeve]

It's not certain that rabbits survived in Britain between the end of Roman power and the Norman conquest. In those days they would have been almost entirely a domesticated animal here, because apparently the widespread feral populations of modern times didn't (and couldn't) exist before changes in cultivation due to the agricultural revolution increased the availability of winter food for them.

 

[LSCatilina]

In those days they would have been almost entirely a domesticated animal here

Domestic rabbit didn't appeared before the Middle Ages. Roman breedings were about "wild" rabbits, a bit like pigeons raised for meat nowadays.

 

[Lamb]

IIRC the Normans introduced Hares for coursing purposes, simply because they were more 'fun' to hunt than Rabbits.

 

[LSCatilina]

Legend as well.
Hares weren't considered as that a noble meat, and proofs point out it did existed in pre-roman Britain, as Caesar mention in De Bello Gallico that Britons didn't eat them, but used them as animi or voluptis. (Basically, pets and enjoyement)

 

[Driftless]

I'm assuming foxes are a primary predator for the rabbits to keep the population in balance. What else preys on them both now and in Roman times? Hawks, Owls, what else?

Pre-Hare/Rabbit, what did the predators eat?

I'm thinking of disasterous impact of "alien invaders", such as the introduction of rabbits into Australia and the like.

 

[Richard V]

Rabbits are not indigenous to Britain? Alert UKIP.

 

[oshron]

I'm assuming foxes are a primary predator for the rabbits to keep the population in balance. What else preys on them both now and in Roman times? Hawks, Owls, what else?

Pre-Hare/Rabbit, what did the predators eat?

I'm thinking of disasterous impact of "alien invaders", such as the introduction of rabbits into Australia and the like.

that's one thing i had thought of when i made the thread, since rabbits are an invasive species in Australia, but if they weren't present in Britain then they might not be introduced to Australia by the British. since rabbits were (apparently) introduced by the Romans, though, that idea is no longer valid since rabbits would be there anyway

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

I'm assuming foxes are a primary predator for the rabbits to keep the population in balance. What else preys on them both now and in Roman times? Hawks, Owls, what else?

Pre-Hare/Rabbit, what did the predators eat?

I'm thinking of disasterous impact of "alien invaders", such as the introduction of rabbits into Australia and the like.

Wolves will. You dont have Coyotes so scratch those from the list. Snakes, Eagles, Buzzards, or about any predator bird. Weasels. Bears and Badgers will snack on the young nestlings when the find them. Rabbits lead short exciting lives

 

[DD951]

I'm assuming foxes are a primary predator for the rabbits to keep the population in balance. What else preys on them both now and in Roman times? Hawks, Owls, what else?

Pre-Hare/Rabbit, what did the predators eat?

I'm thinking of disasterous impact of "alien invaders", such as the introduction of rabbits into Australia and the like.

Pretty much any kind of predator that can catch them- even ones as small as stoats, weasels, and similar critters (there's more than a few videos of them catching rabbits on youtube.) Rabbits are pretty much at the bottom of the food chain, & in the wild, it's pretty unusual for one to last more than a couple years, with predation being one of the top causes of attrition.

(Though considering the mess the bunnies made out of Australia after being introduced there because there aren't a lot of predators there in the areas the rabbits are, that's probably a good thing.

As to what they ate before rabbits came along, native hares, and pretty much any other sort of small mammal that could be easily caught would be on the menu.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Eagles, Buzzards, or about any predator bird:

Buzzard in the Old World sense, for North American non-ornithologists. Think Buteo species like Red-Tailed Hawk, etc., not vultures.

 

[The Professor]

Domestic rabbit didn't appeared before the Middle Ages. Roman breedings were about "wild" rabbits, a bit like pigeons raised for meat nowadays.

So the Roman Rabbits in Britain were wild?
Could have sworn like oshron they only went wild with the Normans.
There goes my idea for wild guinea pigs in Britain!

 

[LSCatilina]

So the Roman Rabbits in Britain were wild?

Not exactly wild, but not tamed or selected, living half-free. in leporaria or warren.
With late MA, you had the appearance of truly tamed races, and use of hutches in the same time.

Could have sworn like oshron they only went wild with the Normans.

Norman role into the introduction of rabbits is a myth, as the distinction between warren and tamed rabbit didn't really existed before the XIVth century, while the process admittedly began during the Early MA (As rabbit foeti were considered as marine, therefore authorized for Lent).

 

[The Professor]

Not exactly wild, but not tamed or selected, living half-free. in leporaria or warren.
With late MA, you had the appearance of truly tamed races, and use of hutches in the same time.

Rabbit Safari!!

Norman role into the introduction of rabbits is a myth, as the distinction between warren and tamed rabbit didn't really existed before the XIVth century, while the process admittedly began during the Early MA (As rabbit foeti were considered as marine, therefore authorized for Lent).

Ah, so it's the change to a more domesticated model in the years following the Normans that gives rise to the origin idea then.

 

[LSCatilina]

Ah, so it's the change to a more domesticated model in the years following the Normans that gives rise to the origin idea then.

Or more probably the usual non-based, non-sourced, widely belived theory (as the BS theory about V-Victory sign being from HYW).
See, the domestication of rabbit began, as a process, during Early MA, with the breeding of rabbits by monks (that introduced quite agricultural and breeding changes on their own, so nothing unusual there) for Lent. While it didn't have clear effects before the Late MA, Normans had absolutly no role on it and didn't even share the same temporal context.

 

[The Professor]

In any road if we delay industrialisation significantly until Guinea Pigs have warrens in the UK can we get them living wild?